Dr. Subramanian Swamy, senior leader of the BJP has exposed the brazen hypocracy, double standards and selective amnesia exhibited by the academics of Indian studies in India and abroad in support of Prof. Wendy Doniger.
His statement says:
Several academics of Indian studies in India and abroad have recently quite brazenly exhibited their selective amnesia by issuing a statement demanding the deletion of Sections 153A&B and Section 295A of the IPC as ultra vires the clauses of free speech enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
They deliberately forget that in late 2011 when the UPA government, on such US-based academics’ pressure, after getting my Harvard courses deleted by a disgraceful and contrived majority in the faculty meeting and without first asking my response, got registered a FIR invoking the same Sections of the IPC for an Op Ed article I had written for a Mumbai daily DNA titled “How to Wipe Out Islamic Terrorism“.
This FIR had to be registered on the orders of the then Home Minister, by the Ministry’s Crime Branch which normally considers terrorist related complaints or information. This was because three Police Stations in Delhi and Mumbai which first received the complaint from the Minorities Commission refused to register the FIR “as disclosing no offence”.
I had approached the Delhi High Court in a Petition and the Court gave me a permanent injunction against my arrest for custodial interrogation, and listed the matter for a full hearing. Till date the Home Ministry has failed to produce in court any evidence that my Op Ed manifested in any substantial or significant unrest or hurt feelings within the meaning the IPC.
Today the shoes pinches on the other foot. Professor Doniger opted out fighting for her fundamental rights, as I had done, and her publishers as any good commercial entity would, cut their losses by surrendering faced with certain defeat in the court.
Hence these academics cry of academic freedom carries no credibility, and there is, I am convinced, no court or future Parliament in India which will respond sympathetically to their demand. Rather most Indians will think that they have got their just dessert.
Filed under: india | Tagged: academic politics, book ban, book banning, DNA, geopolitics, history, hypocrisy, india, indian politics, leftist loonies, muslim terrorism, subramanian swamy, wendy doniger |
BHARATA BHARATI 
I object strongly to anybody telling me what to read, to banning any book.
I did not bother to read Doniger’s book until last week. When a book has become a public controversy, everybody wants to know why and will seek it out. They also have a right to know the details.
Batra with his court case has given universal visibility to the book. It is sold out in India and has become a best seller in the US.
So where is the victory for Hindus?
Hindus are now seen as prudish, fundamentalist and intolerant. Batra (and many self-styled champions of Hindu culture) may be so, but most Hindus are not.
Some year’s ago Parliament had the good sense NOT to ban Kripal’s book Kali’s Child because of the publicity it would attract.
I respect the sentiments of those Hindus who are offended. I am also offended. I am saying that forcing the withdrawal of the book has only played into Penguin’s hands and is a bad tactic.
Penguin has very successfully used Batra’s case against them as a marketing ploy to get rid of a slow-moving book.
Rebuttal’s are read by authors and by readers, and authors do often correct their errors if the rebuttal is factual and sincere (some don’t of course). See the last article posted on this site for a good overview of the issues, called “Do Western religious scholars err in their analysis of Hindu texts?”
[You are posting your replies in the wrong comment field which causes the administrator a problem, as it is difficult to move them.]
LikeLike
@IS – There are thousands of such “scholars” engaged in kinky interpretations of Hindu religious texts, so would you keep on rebutting them with “well-researched” answers everytime they produce one such book? When you yourself admit that it is a “problem”, shouldn’t it be handled fittingly keeping the long-term in view.
Has she ever bothered to check the validity of her “potentially” controversial interpretations at least with a couple of learned religious gurus by humbly approaching them who no one in their right mind would have approved and surely corrected them? No such effort from her part apparently but still she wants to pass off her writings as being scholarly. And it is you who are smug in your belief that rebutting will open her eyes to the reality, as even in the past also she was effectively rebutted with the great result that you are seeing today!
And what about the sentiments of people which in one stroke you have contemptuously dismissed with the unwarranted ad hominem attack as “smug, self-righteous pretension”!!! Is it not a characteristic of “liberal progressives” who want everything to happen acc. to their modern, rational views where even faith is concerned by not valuing TIME-TESTED people’s sentiments which are certainly not my own creation? And sir – it is not to you and me but it is to these “sentiments” that we have to bow in deference.
Going by your arguments, the US should also not tighten it’s visa and security norms but allow ghastly terrorist attacks to happen in the name of freedom of movement and then keep on taking “well-researched measures” to counter them after the blood has been spilled and getting wise after the event !!
As Oscar Wilde has put it brilliantly – “The thief is only the artist, the policeman is the critic” !!!
LikeLike
See Arvind Kumar’s article ‘Wendy Doniger’s fake victimhood’ here.
Arvind Kumar writes:
“India would have been a free-speech state instead of a state subject to “public order” if Jawaharlal Nehru had not targeted Hindus and amended the Constitution curtailing free-speech rights in the country.”
This statement has to be verified. Did Nehru in fact amend the Constitution to curtail free speech?
The IPC laws that affect both Doniger and Swamy are Macaulay’s laws of 1860, not Nehru’s. Nehru chose to continue the British system because it served his interest and that of the Congress Party.
Specifically these laws are:
>> 295A: 5[ Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.– Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of 6[ citizens of India], 7[ by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise] insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 8[ three years], or with fine, or with both.]
>> 153A: 1[ Promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.–
(1) Whoever-
(a) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill- will between different religious, racials, language or regional groups or castes or communities, or
(b) commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity, 2[ or]
(c) 2[ organizes any exercise, movement, drill or other similar activity intending that the participants in such activity shall use or be trained to use criminal force or violence or knowing it to be likely that the participants in such activity will use or be trained to use criminal force or violence, or participates in such activity intending to use or be trained to use criminal force or violence or knowing it to be likely that the participants in such activity will use or be trained to use criminal force or violence, against any religious, racial, language or regional group or caste or community and such activity for any reason whatsoever causes or is likely to cause fear or alarm or a feeling of insecurity amongst members of such religious, racial, language or regional group or caste or community,] shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
(2) Offence committed in place of worship, etc.– Whoever commits an offence specified in sub- section (1) in any place of worship or in any assembly engaged in the performance of religious worship or religious ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine.]
>> 298: Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings.– Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any gesture in the sight of that person or places any object in the sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both. CHAPTER XVI OF OFFENCES AFFECTING THE HUMAN BODY CHAPTER XVI OF OFFENCES AFFECTING THE HUMAN BODY Of offences affecting life.
>> 295A: 5[ Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.– Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of 6[ citizens of India], 7[ by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise] insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 8[ three years], or with fine, or with both.]
>> 505(2) 2[ Statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill- will between classes.– Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement or report containing rumour or alarming news with intent to create or promote, or which is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill- will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Source: Indian Kanoon
LikeLike
How has forcing Penguin to withdraw the book served the Hindu interest?
The book is still available everywhere and Hindus have now got a bad name.
Batra has assisted Penguin in giving universal visibility to a forgotten tome. Today’s news reports soaring sales in the US. In India the book is sold out. Penguin has not lost a rupee and has rid itself of a slow moving item that was giving it a headache.
Persons who demand book bans think they have the right to decide issues for others. They think they know better than everybody else. But they do not have the intelligence or knowledge of history to reply to Doniger’s book. So they resort to force.
Who are you or Batra to decide what I or anybody else should read?
You have no right, only your smug, self-righteous pretension that you know what is better for me than I do.
Uncle Joe Stalin thought the same.
Book-banning—or its economic equivalent—is absolutely bad in principle and policy and Indians—Hindus, Christians, and Muslims—should abandon the indulgence and approach problems like Doniger’s book with researched rebuttals and an understanding of the implications of their actions.
But you are not listening so there is no point in continuing this exchange….
LikeLike
@ IS: “withdrawal or banning it is not the way to handle the problem”. On the contrary, it is one of the most effective way to teach such writers a humbling lesson. It helps show that her prurient “scholarship” is worth the toxic chemical pulp(now not even useful to nature or animals) which her books were made into and that she cannot get away with her kinky writings that can potentially shake the faith of innocent believers. Mine is a religion that gloriously stood the test of time unlike other other ones which is an eloquent testimony to it’s beneficent, enduring nature. In Telugu they say – “Nammi Chedinavaaru leru” (meaning “there is none who stood to lose by following Sanatana Dharma”). The cover page of her book itself is enough to guess the kind of the contents. Of course a book is never to be judged by it’s cover but again “face is the index of mind” and so does it apply for a good book.
Srila Prabhupada used to say that the real business of this precious human janma is done for when one indulges in these kind of useless pursuits as there are many authoritative, experienced (not trial-and-error methods like in science but time-tested top-down approach) gurus to teach us about religion whose infallible teachings help us tread the path of what is right.
Finally, proactive prevention of alienation from Hinduism is better than “post-release” intellectual cures for such kind of “gutter inspector’s literature” !
LikeLike
Both Wendy Doniger and Subramanian Swamy would have probably won their cases in court as ‘malicious intent’ has to be proved.
It is extremely difficult for a prosecutor to prove malicious intent.
Penguin withdrew the book as a marketing ploy to boost the flagging sales of an overweight, ignored tome. It is now out of stock in most Indian book shops, having been sold out in the last week. Penguin will not have to pulp any withdrawn copies because there are no copies left to destroy. They simply won’t reprint and reissue the book in India.
Dinanath Batra and his Shiksha Bachao Andolan have scored a self-goal for Hindus. The book is not banned and remains on the selves of libraries and universities. It is freely available everywhere on the Internet and Batra has assisted Penguin in promoting its universal visibility.
He has also drawn negative attention to the Hindu community at large, getting it labelled as fundamentalist and intolerant. This is not justified. Doniger’s book with its discredited Freudian perspective, is a prurient book full of factual errors. Her intent appears to be to ridicule and denigrate Hinduism. She is following in the footsteps of Christian missionaries who wrote distorted pamphlets about Hinduism in the 18th and 19th centuries. See SRG’s account of these missionaries in History of Hindu-Christian Encounters here.
Hindus have a legitimate complaint against Doniger and her book. But forcing its withdrawal or banning it is not the way to handle the problem.
Books are to be read and critiqued by competent persons, not burned in the fires of righteous indignation by self-styled activists whose thoughtless actions bring reproach on the larger community.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Hindu Internet Defence Force and commented:
Really Good..Jesus Hates Hindus..
LikeLike